[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2016 19:35:36 -0800
From: Steve Muckle <steve.muckle@...aro.org>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
Linux PM list <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@....com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@...ux.intel.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC/RFT][PATCH v4 1/2] cpufreq: New governor using utilization
data from the scheduler
On 03/02/2016 07:20 PM, Steve Muckle wrote:
> Why does the frequency value not help? It is true there may be issues of
> a workload being memory bound and not responding quite linearly to
> increasing frequency, but that would pose a problem for the current
> algorithm also. Surely it's better to attempt a consistent policy which
> doesn't vary based on a platform's fmin value?
FWIW I'm not trying to hold up this series - rather just discuss
possibilities and differences with the now deprecated solution that may
be able to be integrated here sometime in the near future.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists